just because they dont serve your capitalistic overlords doesnt mean they are useless. Education exits to expand you mind and make your life more meaningful through your own deepened understanding of the world. Not everything is a 'tool' to make money. You are free to choose whatever you want to do but its alarming that you think its your place to tell other people to follow in your footsteps and be soulless. its is alarming that the west is cutting down on arts program and its directly related to the economic and human rights decline they are experiencing due to late stage capitalism, the solution is to increase social security benefits so people want to live a full life not become corporate slaves due to poverty.

Learn to be observe things before writing rants online, you have much to see. I suggest cutting down on social media time and do some volunteer work/ family court internship to get out of the victim/ sensationalized mindset social media creates for kids these days (as if teens arent dramatic enough)

GC and M&A - reasonable hours unless its filing season, basically clearing the messes left after board decisions, can be boring but new kinds of stuff/ strange queries comes up all the time, clients feel entitled to your time, chill if you have a non-toxic team, makes you wonder how meaningful life must be in lit

This is an absolutely defamatory thread which seeks to only, without any reason, bring disrepute to a big name like CAM. Yes, it is true that some have left, but as someone mentioned, these persons are not high billers for the firm. There are very capable people within the firm to take on the matters/clients that these individuals have left behind.

Further, the news of other senior partners like RC leaving is complete nonsense which has been put in the air to unnecessarily alarm clients. Stop spreading lies and defamatory statements. Otherwise, we will be forced to take legal measures.

Doesn't NALSAR actually have a management department (in a law school), and yet this law firm went to a business school?

You see, whichever way you spin this, it is a huge setback for all NLUs. This is time for a reality check instead of deflecting this. The downside of being a state university is getting starker by the day.

Guys, let's play devil's advocate for a second, shall we?

Sure this order seems pretty weird. But what about the argument that the persons who participated in this campaign are behaving in a way that undermines (or may have the potential to undermine) the confidence of the public in the profession of advocate? What is the substantive response to that? Because the satirical letter posted in reply doesn't address that point. People might be somewhat tired of citing ADM Jabalpur and Plessy, but in the spirit of free enquiry, we must not forget J.S. Mill who reminds us in On Liberty to know the argument of the opponent like the back of our hand. I assume that this undermining/potential of undermining confidence in the profession argument is the one they'll come up with, so it's important that it be responded to.

It is 100 percent the norm. Just compare salaries across teams and you will understand. They even offered signing bonuses (something thats unheard off) to several new joinees, while existing employees didnt even get their pay bands sorted. Pay is a complete black hole and the disparity is stark.

Indira Jaising and Menaka Guruswamy both charge the same? Isn't that a bit surprising, considering that one is a lot more experienced?

https://www.instagram.com/p/DcAm34MEnwZ/?img_index=1

It was ridiculously blown out of proportion. One unarmed drunk 20 year old who could barely walk straight being a threat to a campus of hundreds of students and a dozen guards. It would have taken 4-5 guys from the BH to walk out and whack his ass, but then how would they sensationalise it

What about offices that have a broader TMT practice combining TMT with IPR and emerging areas like AI, data/privacy, and technology law, essentially a TMT × IPR practice? Would you say the same concern about limited opportunities and lower-paying roles applies to those teams as well?

I can understand your frustration and angst. It is a triple whammy - on one hand, NLUs are desperate to be nationalized with no success in sight whatsoever; on the other hand, they are being sidelined over IIMs where legal leadership programmes are concerned; and as a final nail in their coffin, arts and humanities departments are being downsized even in the top institutions - no less than Harvard (when BA-LLB continue to be the flagship programmes for all NLUs).

https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2026/8/11/fas-social-sciences-layoffs/

Third year here, the child is blowing things out of proportion. A senior got kicked out for some reason (idk exactly why) and he came back drunk, hopped over the wall at midnight and created a bit of ruckus and was again shown way out. This happened multiple times during the entire night. The GB is sweating in fear that the guy is a active security threat as if he'll kill anyone in his sight which is very ridiculous and blown out of proportion.

I agree that be it living conditions or acads, everything is already in ruins but nothing new. You may remove the post mod.

Boss are you thick? The CJI is not a political actor, and if his political affiliations are even remotely visible (let alone so brazenly) then it indicates a rot that goes to the core of how the country is run currently? Kant is the CJI, not your drunk uncle at a family dinner where his actions can be ignored

Yes, supporting a political party openly while being incumbent in the highest judicial office of the country is more than enough to draw the ire. Officeholders should be held responsible for their actions while in office, and not just how they fulfill their official responsibilities, which for some reason is a point that goes above your head

So I'm an Advocate with around 4 years Litigation experience and over 2 years experience in government organizations. Which are some good law firms I can seek to join? Good as in with respect to people, pay, and good working hours. I know law firms have hectic working hours but I am looking for some which have reasonable hours. I'm looking for Mumbai location and Disputes/Litigation team role.

https://images.assettype.com/barandbench/2026-08-13/c8453c14/Letter_to_VC__NALSAR_University_of_Law__Hyderabad_and_the_Secretary__All_STBCs.pdf

Sub.: Seeking a factual report on the persons instrumental in drafting communication bearing No. BCI:D.5449/2026

Sir,

We have taken note, without the expected amusement, of a Notice purporting to emanate from a statutory regulator, in which an entire batch of law graduates has been collectively debarred, for the alleged crime of studying at an institution where, apparently, someone somewhere had an opinion. We knew that thought crime is to be punished in the current climate but being able to punish someone for their neighbours thought crime makes me covet your post (make me your padawan). This is regulatory stupidity dressed up in letterhead, and we salute the confidence it took to sign it.

In the quixotic spirit of the true factual position the Notice so solemnly claims to seek, we request the following, within three days:

1. a) The names and designations of members present, and the quorum achieved, when it was decided that natural justice is for other people.
2. b) The minutes recording the identity of the reliable sources, so we may assess whether they rank above or below rumour, astrology, vibes, and WhatsApp forwards as forms of admissible evidence. We must ensure that the zen Z virus has not infected the august regulator.
3. c) The legal opinion, if any exists, that permitted an entire batch to be punished for the alleged conduct of a few, a principle of jurisprudence we eagerly await making Bentham blush.
4. d) The name of the person principally instrumental in deciding that convocation guest lists now fall within the disciplinary jurisdiction of the Bar Council, so that we have a reference to cite as an example of cooption, arbitrainess and immorality we are tired of citing ADM Jabalpur and Plessy.

We trust the Council, ever vigilant against dirty politics, shall take steps to stop the zen Z virus from spreading in it. Finally, we thank you for not using gen-AI, claude would stutter to satisfy you.

Receipt may kindly be acknowledged, capriciously, if that's more familiar.

Guess what buddy, I happen to come from one of the states you mentioned, I didnt come back to a hot meal, I spent the last 5 years as a broke student living off shared rooms, meals from Dabba services or lunchbox/ Dabba garam/ box8.

There is a difference between privilege and not willing to get off your back, either get a top score in clat or work your ass off, or what? the best firms in the country will hire maybe 80 students of the 1.5-2 lakh law graduates per year will hire you off the back of you doing nothing either academically or just showing the initiative to work?

Why not just ask the government to pay you a couple crores a year for nothing while your at it.

My friend, see, we are getting to the problem. You are thinking way too much as a lawyer and too little as a market participant who needs help from a fair trade regulator.

"I'm just fundamentally against a setup that combines investigative and adjudicative powers with the same authority. I'm well aware of the CCPA, SEBI and other such frameworks. My scepticism applies to them equally."

In sum, your constitutional idealism – a version that comes from strict separation of powers, which, by the way, is not even practised across the board here in India among regulators, not even in the EU, since a full review appellate forum is in place – now stands in the way of parties having an effective forum to complain about malevolence in the market.

You place 100% fairness above everything, ignoring practical realities and institutional precedent – to the detriment of the object of the Act.

Why is "suo motu" important? I will give you several, besides chopping off 3 months from the timeline by doing away with preliminary hearings.

First, where there is a power imbalance in the market, there aren't many complainants to go around. If a supplier or vendor filed a CCI complaint, they would often be destroying a market relationship. Having no "suo motu" powers forces market participants to risk their capital to seek a remedy for what they believe is unfair. They barely do. Which is also why the CCI is stuck with forum-shopping cases and Hail Mary passes – the real cases of market abuse will not see the light of day, even with the provision for anonymous informants. Any investigation from an anonymous informant will be rife with writs as well.

Second, it is a vicious cycle of the first; no suo motu powers for the CCI encourages impunity for those who do have market power, knowing they have commercial leverage over those who would complain. This isn't new – a simple study of cartel dynamics should explain this. Members in a cartel are not equal. The CCI recently realised this in a set of orders that identified a ringleader. Imagine the number of SMEs in India stuck with one-sided clauses. The MSME Act protects invoices and receivables; Section 3(4) of the CCI was supposed to protect their options. Go to dealer negotiations and see what life-and-death powers people have over someone else's blood and sweat.

Third, the CCI carries a big stick, which was somewhat curbed by Excel Corp and by guidelines that emerged from Ramana's decision. Now you have Big Tech, which is out to shape and size that stick. The stick is being moved from deterrence to a cost of doing business – something manageable. By removing suo motu, you reduce the number of times the stick can potentially hit you, making the CCI risk for management "manageable". Go inside a sales and marketing team and watch the befuddlement when you tell them you cannot talk to competitors. Then go watch the management conversation with them where they "price" the CCI risk.

Finally, there is a brief window for market censure when the risks are not fully realised by the company under investigation and when affected parties are sufficiently motivated not to self-censor. If the CCI were to open a suo motu case and then allow interim order hearings, there would be a window for a party to take advantage before single-party threats and incentives hit back. The CCI fails to realise how parties under investigation can affect the investigation as it drags on in the Indian political economy. Lawyers know this – we all adjourn till the roster changes or till the government and government pleader change.

You reduce institutional capture to just discretion that affects the final outcome of the case. Your concerns exist; I don't deny them. Like how the CCI will now use its discretion in the settlement and commitments regime, which cannot be challenged before an appellate forum. However, throughout the world, the biggest discretion that antitrust enforcers with finite resources face is "prioritisation". Not HOW they analyse a market or WHY they analyse in a particular manner, but WHICH markets they look at and WHEN they focus on them. Discretion is actually far greater in the WHICH and WHEN than the HOW and WHY. The HOW and WHY will be heard by an appellate court. Which and when will not. Further, "WHICH" matters because it determines which resources are applied, and "WHEN" determines how early a problem is diagnosed (leading to ex-ante or post-facto questions).

On Meta, specialised regulatory bodies like the CCI were granted powers to regulate their own procedures and to act as civil courts, but they remain fully subject to writ jurisdiction. The judicial branch could review the bias. Meta elected it, used it and lost it. Too many parties have been abusing the Bharti judgment, in my view, treating it as a case establishing regulatory walled gardens. It does not. Thankfully, there is a High Court decision now stating so. Bodies like the CCI with civil court powers – this was, firstly, meant to be enabling, not stifling; and second, due process was to follow. Instead, over time, tribunals have adopted the worst traits of civil courts and their trappings, with prolonged delays. I will grant you that institutional design is a problem, but so is institutional ossification.

So NLU students are dumb ? Indian students are lazy and less capable of hard work ? Or of solving complex legal problems ? Or we should expect less from our students - after all being a lawyer in India is meaningless and not like being a lawyer in the US? What do you actually mean to say ?

Honestly students that think like this shouldn’t go to NLUs. Go to some private law school and buy a degree if that’s all you want.

I’m sorry totally ridiculous. Faculty anyway can’t enroll. Faculty stay silent because most of them have matured and are somewhat moderate. Those that haven’t - understand that they’re in a government job and need to have some discipline. But the idea that the left is censored in academia is ridiculous on the face of it- the left hasn’t ever dominated academia more

Thats a nice list. Most of these names are highly regarded in their resoective industry sectors. Now please prepare one which idents who moved in. Lets see how the replacements compare in terms of industry standing and repute. Clients deserve to know where and who they are placing their trust in.

Ask yourself: is this environment genuinely worth the cost?
You are, in effect, signing yourself up for a culture of burnout, characterised by:

1. Relentless 16–18-hour workdays, leaving little meaningful room for rest, recovery, or a life outside work;
2. Crushing and sustained stress, compounded by an artificially manufactured sense of urgency—often created by individuals whose management style is needlessly abrasive, boorish, and corrosive—which, over time, is bound to exact a serious toll on one’s mental well-being;
3. Virtually no meaningful scope for professional growth, particularly where certain seniors appear to believe that belittling, undermining, or diminishing their juniors is necessary to maintain authority and efficiency;
4. A persistent culture of public humiliation, reprimand, bullying and shaming, including instances where individuals are subjected to criticism or embarrassment despite having committed no discernible fault.

These are not isolated concerns. People have been leaving the team in significant numbers, and the pattern is difficult to ignore. The team may have initially succeeded in attracting exceptionally meritorious candidates, in part because of the reputation and stature associated with AS. However, if virtually all of those individuals have subsequently chosen to leave, one must ask what that attrition is signalling.

At some point, the question ceases to be whether the organisation can continue to attract talented people and becomes whether it can retain them.

One cannot indefinitely conceal or rationalise the underlying reality. A prestigious name may attract good candidates, but it cannot, by itself, compensate for an environment characterised by chronic overwork, humiliation, fear, and the absence of genuine professional development.

Take all of these factors into account before making your decision. The name attached to the team may open a door, but it is worth asking whether the environment on the other side of that door is one in which you can realistically thrive—or merely survive.

Facing this in NLUD. Few senior professors are adamant on giving less marks saying you have not written as I taught. A lot of them have been known to just fail or give like highest 60 out of 100 and feel proud that they are cutting marks and are strict. We all know how they teach and then pretending to be strict. I ve seen them ridicule few faculty who mark properly saying noone gets above 60 in my subject. You are giving her too much. I think we need to start questioning these relics.

That's a nice way of giving a positive spin to a hugely negative development for the NLUs.

There are enough and more posts on this platform on how law graduates from NLUs should not be going to business schools for further studies, with reasons ranging from naive to atrocious.

The trigger for this has come from a law firm, and when it mattered, they went to a business school. NLUs are not on their radar when push comes to shove on leadership. NLUs may want to reflect on this, instead of being in denial and pretending to treat this as business as usual.

Because when you do that on this site, people tend to start making all forms of garbage accusations all the time. Believe me, if the person's name was supplied, we would spend five years fighting on something like: (a) whether they were empathetic or a bully as a teacher; (b) what is the place of empathy in higher education (if any); (c) specific accusations against this particular faculty; and (d) whether or not they constituted bullying. In the interval, the actual person would have finished their PhD, probably have gotten an academic position, gotten a global talent visa and be looking forward to settlement in the UK.

Can we pinpoint a few reasons behind the spectacular fall (except for NMD wanting it all for himself) and subsequent inability to make a comeback for a once super-hailed specialist law firm ? I have been told by very-senior people who used to work at NDA at its peak that they used to punch way above their weight class given their size ?

My objective is to establish how (almost ?) an institution which gave the Bombay based corp law circles so many good lawyers and and even firms (BLC, ANAGRAM, RESOLUT, KCO - FUNDS & TAX, even some big accounting firms) has now next to no existence - a guidebook on what not to do after achieving heights ?

I also wonder if the fall of the UPA govt. has something to do with their fall ? cuz I have been told the same - which does not seem right to be as they did well for a few years post 2014

I was not in NDA in its hay day I am junior looking for greener pastures !

Das & Dipke have threatened to counter BCI, esp MM. This MM has had a long run with any one who doesn't agree with avuncular politics and whims. And he gets tacit approval from highest levels of various powers that be although in rare occasions he has been lightly chided as well. Kian@LI had boldly challenged BCI and MM lost his marbles.

While cockroaches are considering swarm attack what are the NLU student associations contemplating beyond choosing sides? Also what about the CLAT consortium? Bend, crawl, grovel?

Once again brings into focus whether these courses are out of sync with market realities.

https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2026/8/11/fas-social-sciences-layoffs/

I'll be brutally honest with you: I can count the number of partners who actually do media law at a remotely decently paying firm on my fingertips. For each such team, there exist at least 50 M&A teams in the market that pay similarly. Those are not good odds. Your chances of finding a job in a decently paying firm in the TMT vertical as a fresher are therefore very slim.

My honest advice would be to pivot unless you're absolutely smitten by TMT as a practice area and do not mind going to much smaller and lower-paying IP/Media law positions.

Sorry. Non lawyers for management functions work well. You only need to have faith in them. See the other platform. When you only use your so called non lawyers to ass kiss and hold their balls on everything, preventing them from actually bringing about change for the better, youre just making a fucking fool of yourself and wasting their talents.

did someone see this https://theprint.in/judiciary/bci-suspends-enrolment-of-nalsar-2026-grads-over-cji-convocation-row-cites-groupism-dirty-politics/3014014/

BCI first decided that outgoing NALSAR batch should not be allowed to enrol, later they modified their own order

if i am ever to provide an example of a capricious (improper and illegal) use of authority, i shall use this incident

Updated list.

1. Ravindra Bandhakavi (to a direct competitor) 2. Shaneen Parikh (to a direct competitor)

3. Kapil Arora (to a direct competitor)

4. Ajay Sawhney (to a direct competitor)

5. Abhilash Pillai (to a direct competitor)

6. Faraz Alam Sagar (to a direct competitor)

7. Aditi Misra (to a direct competitor)

8. Bhupendra Verma (to a direct competitor)

9. Rachika Sahay (to a direct competitor)

10. Garima Shahani (to a direct competitor)

11. Amarta Roy(to a direct competitor)

12. Poornima Singh(to a direct competitor)

13. Srabanee Ghosh(to a direct competitor)

14. Anchal Dhir(to a direct competitor)

15. Shubham Rastogi(to a direct competitor)

16. Omar Ahmad (going for independent counsel practice)

17. Gauhar Mirza(to a direct competitor)

18. Reuben Chacko(to a direct competitor)

19. RC (with some other partners) - easily 4-5 partners together.

20. YA (with some other partners) - easily 4-5 partners together

21. Vartika Jain (moved in house)

22. Ashwin Sapra(to a direct competitor)

23. Alok Shankar (going for independent counsel practice)

24. Anandita Kaushik (moved in house)

25. LV (moving to academics)

Easily a loss of approximately 35 partners within a year.

More exits will come post Diwali bonus. In any case blast for next March is also already in pipeline.

What an unprecedented move! The Bar Council of India (BCI) Chairperson has directed all State Bar Councils not to enrol students who graduated from the NALSAR University of Law, Hyderabad, in 2026 as advocates until further orders, while seeking a factual report from the university on those involved in a campaign opposing the participation of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant in its convocation.

When people ask why faculties stay silent on these issues, this is exactly why they stay silent:

https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/no-nalsar-graduate-of-2026-will-be-enrolled-as-advocate-says-bci-chairman-after-students-campaign-against-cji-surya-kant-545695

They’re a smaller firm so naturally have lesser hiring needs. They however pay at par with T1s which means they have T1 level demand for jobs without the similar no of openings. That’s the case at TT&A as well, especially their Mumbai teams. They also have a relatively higher retention rate, which means they have a higher proportion of mid-level associates as compared to your typical T1s

I’ve literally never voted for the bjp. So right off bat you’re making stupid assumptions.Youre borderline incoherent with that antisemitic nonsense. I have no dog in that race and you’re presuming all of my positions from one stray comment about how people of different political persuasions exist in positions of power. You claimed that having him in his position drove you suicidal- that’s actually disturbed. You need help. You need to learn that the world will have people who disagree with you and you will still have to get on and work with them and exhibit basic civility.

He called fake degree holders parasites. You may disagree with him - but baseline expectation is you actually know what he did to earn or not earn your condemnation. Is the Supreme Court the port of first call for every instance of police brutality in the country ? Was he simply trying to get on with his business - judging cases that actually were properly in the supreme courts jurisdiction instead of turning the court into a stage for a politicised media trial ? Honestly you sound quite uninformed and uneducated.

Which ideas of his are bad actually ? Why can’t students listen to ideas they disagree with once in a while ? What terrible thing would happen? What is your obsession with ideological purity ?

And let’s be real - Nalsar doesn’t provide a platform for the chief justice of India. Regardless of what these students do - he has already reached the goals he likely had in his professional life- goals almost none of these students will likely be able to reach. The only thing no platforming does - is reduce civility and polarise discourse in a democracy. It only puts you in a SILO - it’s not liberal - this is an anti-liberal move.

You absolutely have the freedom of speech to be as stupid as you’d like - but other people can call cancel culture what it is and they can decide your arguments are stupid. And ultimately - I’d hold the adults in your life responsible for failing to inculcate enlightenment values in you.

I understand for someone who hasn’t achieved much else in their professional life they want to assume that their opponents will always be poorly educated. In any case - you may choose to bury your head in the sand and not believe me - but I graduated from Nalsar- near the top of my class, and went on to do remarkably well. I’m actually a favorite son of the institution. Neither of our qualifications - should weigh into whether our arguments are valuable. That’s just base credentialism. Something NLU students would grow out of in their first year.

I know Gogoi wasn’t a chief guest- that wasn’t the point. The point was that this CJI unlike others hasn’t done anything personally to earn this kind of opprobrium. You may dislike him - but he didn’t write the ram janmabhoomi verdict, he didn’t write Supriyo, he hasn’t abused his powers and he hasn’t acted in a way unbecoming of his office. He’s actually a fairly middle of the road judge. His comments - are actually arguably taken out of context- he called people who hold fake degrees parasites and cockroaches - is it an elegant turn of phrase ? No. A wiser political movement might have asked what that implies about many public officials who have fake degrees. About protests- Supreme Court is not the place to investigate allegations of police misconduct at the first instance. It’s an appellate court.

What exactly has surya Kant done to earn this ? Is it that he supports a political party- or is seen to support a party - that Nalsar students dislike ? If that’s enough reason to behave in so uncivil and discourteous a manner - I’m afraid these students will have a rude shock coming to them when they go into the profession where most professionals are right wing.

It is of course students right to be as stupid as they’d like - just as it is mine to call them on it. I really think maybe their educators have failed them at this point. It absolutely is not the essence of Nalsar to be entitled and ignorant and to engage in cancel culture. The essence of Nalsar - was developing deep thoughtful young people who were committed to being good lawyers.

The pay structure at ELP is very uneven. At the same level, one attorney may be earning less than the other. They don’t have pay band systems for different PQEs/designations and are non-transparent about the level of pay at each level. Bonuses are uneven too. So, while one attorney may feel they are earning more, another one feels shortchanged. Brutal fact is, people know about it too, but god knows why they have stuck around at ELP.

Clearly never been to Telangana, have you? You're the one in a bubble. And the reason NALSAR (or any NLU) will never have the streets in the same way as IITs or AIIMS is because law as a profession is largely looked down upon in India. Doesn't take away from them being the peak of the profession (sorry JGLS)

Answering this a bit seriously, now there are a few checks and balances that may happen. For instance, the externals- we do not know who we are marking- we mark 1 part of answer script of 250-300 papers. So practically, one teacher failing a student on its own- that would be almost impossible.